A Discussion I Had on Ethics

A reply to Me, and My response

So I had this One who was questioning the three Laws, Natural Law expressed as the three things not to do, that I brought up in an article. I had made a distinction between sentience and sapience, and this is the reply I received:

I think you mean "sentient" ones not "sapient" ones. Sentient means "self aware". Sapient means "wise".
So, humans shoud not eat things that are sentient? Why? Says who? But it's OK if things that are sentient eat humans? We owe to sentience something that sentience does not owe to us? What about things that are not sentient? Just checking. Short of eating, what about plain old self defense?
I was unaware that a CAP in the middle of a word meant anything at all, other than the writer is full of herself. Please do point out the rule of grammar that explains and supports what you claim it means. But I suspect you cannot. In fact, I know you cannot. That's a made up meaning, made up by you and understood by you alone. There is no such rule anywhere.
What "semantics"? Semantics is about word choice, as oppsoed to meaning. I did not take issue with a word choice or replace your word with mine. What "semantics" do you mean?
Can you address the question about how property asrises if no one can take a thing that does not already belong to them?
I'm thinking you pulled these "laws" out of your behind. Are you sure it's me that lacks reason?

Well. I guess this One has not studied common law, which these three Laws are the foundation of. Pretty sure I did not pull common law out of My behind… Anyway, I responded:

LOL! No, I did not. Sentience would be 100% of that which lives. Sapience is the defining feature in Ones who can discern, describe and choose to live by Natural Law. Humans have that capacity.

As for "says who," if You ask every Human if doing these things is okay to do to Them, statistically every single One of Us would say "no." (To say "yes" would be consenting and rather leaves the question unanswered.)

I have yet had anyOne offer something that does not fall into these that is not a matter of taste.

So the answer is... Says all of Us.

The three Laws of Ethics (Natural Law expressed as the three things not to do):

1. Do not willfully and without fully informed consent hurt or kill the flesh of anOther

2. Do not willfully and without fully informed consent take or damage anything that does not belong to You alone

3. Do not willfully defraud anOther (which can only happen without fully informed consent)

Self Defense and Ethics (3 min): https://odysee.com/@amaterasusolar:8/self-defense-and-ethics:1?lid=eeff9e0c80138ce03e22d76bcd5f2f873ff46b72

As I have been in pain these last few weeks, I did not go in depth into all this One’s objections, but it was clear that this One wanted an argument, not a discussion. I just had no energy to pick apart the whole of the complaints. LOL!

Anyway, I will take this opportunity to offer links to My work below, My work to solve for the psychopaths in control, giving ideas for how Humanity might best get out of the control of the psychopaths presently in power.

I do hope You choose to watch the short videos and read the short articles I offer, and consider adding Your energy into the aggregate of Us who stand sovereign on Ethical ground.

.

---

As My regular readers know, I ask for no money as payment for My work for Humanity. I ask for payment in shares. Please, if You feel My work has value, share with ten or more People. This will be the only way the information is spread.

.

.

Links to info:

.

Solving for Poverty (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/solving-for-poverty

Just Stop Consenting! (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/just-stop-consenting

Money Motivates the Most Marvelous Manifestations! (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/money-motivates-the-most-marvelous

The Betterment Ethic vs. the Slave’s Creed (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/the-betterment-ethic-vs-the-slaves

Blueprint for a Society of Ethical Sovereigns (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/blueprint-for-a-society-of-ethical

Electrogravitics: Gravity Control & Energy from the Aether (9 min): https://odysee.com/@amaterasusolar:8/electrogravitics-gravity-control-energy:6?lid=eeff9e0c80138ce03e22d76bcd5f2f873ff46b72

The Third Option: Anarcho-Abundancism (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/the-third-option-anarcho-abundancism

One Outcome in Abundance (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/one-outcome-in-abundance

.

.

---

.

Signature:

.

.

Endia – A Short Story by Amaterasu Solar

http://tapyoureit.boards.net/thread/260/endia

.

Quite the Opposite – A Short Story for Change – by Amaterasu Solar

http://tapyoureit.boards.net/thread/72/quite-opposite-short-story-change

.

The Abundance Paradigm – A Novella by Amaterasu Solar

http://tapyoureit.boards.net/thread/242/abundance-paradigm-novella

.

.

My father taught Me never to believe anything. He told Me to place probabilities and adjust them as new data come along, asking the question, "Does that explain what I see?," when evaluating data. He was an aerospace engineer, and worked with T Townsend Brown (see My featured vid on Odysee or YouToilet). From a very early age I was concerned that the way I was told things worked, in terms of government and social affairs, did not explain what I saw. So the first few decades I worked to determine WHY this was.

I wound up in banking, seeing the flow of things in the headquarters of a major bank in Los Angeles. I became intimately familiar with the flow of money, and economics. I asked the question, "Why do We use money?"

When the web arrived, My research capabilities flourished, and I learned much that explained what I saw, but the only explanations I found for why We use money started with trade and barter, which are still money in a direct form, and did not answer the WHY. Then, I came upon the explanation that these were used because, with a finite amount of stuff, it was to ensure that We got Our "fair share" in a scarcity environment, in exchange for the work We added.

From this I realized the WHY. We were accounting for Our energy input into things. And that We needed to do this because the Human energy was scarce compared to what We needed to be produced (back then).

I also discovered that over half Our planet's wealth was "owned" by fewer than 100 Humans...

I was very interested in psychology, too. And studied it deeply, being fascinated by psychopathy, focusing on that aberration, learning that They had discovered a gene that manifested Individuals who were incapable of love, compassion, caring, and empathy for Others – primary psychopaths. Seeing that the wealth was so disproportionate, and that the families who "owned" it inbred, what would explain what I saw would be that They wanted to retain that psychopathic gene. Given that the wealth could feed, clothe, house ALL of Us (and give Us freedom) abundantly and many times over, and yet None set forth to care for Humanity, I had to give probability approaching 100% that They are psychopaths, as that explains perfectly what I see, and answers My quest for why the way I was told things worked did not explain what I saw.

And I asked... If I was a psychopath, with enough wealth to buy anything and anyOne I wanted to, and given that money = power (power over Others is something psychopaths seek), would I be motivated to create a false "reality" for the masses and thereby manipulate Them? I think You can figure out what answer I came up with. And would that explain what I see? Absolutely.

Now, given that money is merely the accounting token used to account for Our Human energy, it would follow that free energy would threaten fully the accounting for Our energy. If I was a psychopath, with enough money to buy sites like Wikipedia, the media, the education system, etc., would I do all I could to suppress and hide free energy?

And given I personally know that electrogravitics offers both gravity control and energy from the aether (the electromagnetic field that pervades the universe), and that it went into black projects, such efforts to hide and suppress would explain what I see completely.

So I am neither a "conspiracy theorist," nor am I a "conspiritard," but rather... I am a conspiracy analyst. And given this analysis, knowing that conspiracies are the NORM in history and that they didn't just stop some years back, I conclude that conspiracies abound. That explains perfectly what I see.

.

Love always.